Solo: A Mediocre Star Wars Story...
Braden White
 |
Disney ©
|
It's important to note that "Solo: A Star Wars Story" had everything stacked against it. Right as it was announced, the vast majority of Star Wars fans expressed their disinterest in seeing a Han Solo prequel. His character was already so prominent that seeing a big screen presentation of his story would be a waste of time and resources when there are so many other stories to be explored. "Rogue One" was a solid example of an elaboration on a small element of the Star Wars universe which had little exposure previously. The casting of Alden Ehrenreich drew its own controversy as the recasting of one of the most iconic characters in cinema would anger fans no matter what. However, this would only pail in comparison to the myriad of production issues. From the firing of directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller ("Lego Movie", "21 Jump Street"), to the rumors of acting coaches being brought on, and the inflated budget as a result of extensive re-shoots for as much of 80% of the film. The fact that this film even made it to theaters is a monumental feat on its own. Does "Solo: A Star Wars Story" ultimately stumble on its many hurdles? Not as much as it probably should've.
After abandoning a life as an imperial recruit, Han Solo (Alden Ehrenreich) meets his future co-pilot, Chewbacca, before joining a band of criminals headed by the experienced Beckett (Woody Harrelson). The crew embarks on a series of heists which bring Solo into contact with the crime lord Dryden Vos (Paul Bettany), his former love Qi'ra (Emilia Clarke) and the charismatic Lando Calrissian (Donald Glover).
"Solo: A Star Wars Story" had no right to be anything but an absolute dumpster fire. Rumors spread that Disney was prepared to write the whole film off as a financial failure, despite coming off three consecutive franchise films each grossing over a billion dollars. The sheer idea of one of the largest franchises in film history expecting to take a loss demonstrated a ludicrous lack of confidence. The final product wasn't a horrendous car crash, but rather a harmless fender bender. A film which walks the line of mediocrity occasionally dipping between good and bad. This is funny enough, reflective of the director, Ron Howard's filmography. "Solo" is very safe, which is not necessarily a bad thing given the previous Star Wars film, which sought to subvert expectations, split the fan base down the middle. While films taking risks needs to be praised, this franchise has proven that it doesn't always pay off. "Solo" is an easy watch, which stands as an experience which is harmless and enjoyable, yet forgettable and plain.
The story is rather refreshing for the franchise's cinematic presents, being much smaller in scope missing any "fate of the galaxy" stakes. This vastly different approach is far more fitting of the character. This allows for a film focused on providing a fun ride, something the films have been lacking in lately, with "Rogue One" being a dreary slog through the horrors of war, and "The Last Jedi" focusing more on subverting the status quo. It's not that "Solo" is or superior to either of those films, however it is perhaps the type of movie the franchise needed- something refreshing in principle yet so typical in execution.
Unsurprisingly, the film is (for the most part) visually fantastic. Special effects and production design is still Star Wars' strongest element, immersing the audience in the galaxy's crime world. The cinematography continues to make full utilization of the excellent sets and locations, always filling the frame with life and purpose. The locations are perhaps the most grounded of the franchise, preferring very diverse exotic real life locations for filming as opposed to green screen alien worlds. We see expansive sandy beaches, terrifyingly gorgeous snowy mountains, claustrophobic mines, and gritty battlefields. However, when things kick into high gear, the film's visuals begin to fault. The major action scenes gravely suffer from rapid editing and far too much happening on screen, creating an incomprehensible mess, more fitting in a "Transformers" movie. There are exceptions to this, as a particular heist scene early int eh film is one of the franchise's greatest set pieces to date.
As with any Star Wars film, the acting is a mixed bag. Ehrenreich and Glover shine in their portrayals of Solo and Lando respectively. These aren't the iconic characters we knew. They are younger, naive, and unestablished, and the actors realized this. Through their take on the characters we see how they could eventually end up as their confident, charismatic selves present in the OT. The film is far better thanks to this as opposed to just having the new leads give impersonations of Harrison Ford and Billy Dee Williams, as many people had expected. Paul Bettany is also great always igniting the screen with energy and ferocity. Aside from these however, the other performances are very unremarkable. Woody Harrelson plays a Woody Harrelson type, and although she tries, Emilia Clarke fails to bring her role to life and provides the film's weakest, and most forgettable, presence.
Finally, the most unfortunate hallmark of any of the franchise is the less-than-stellar writing. The dialogue here is perhaps the worse since the prequels. The actors genuinely seem uncomfortable delivering their lines, and although it never reaches the awfulness of "I hate sand, its course... blah blah blah", the audience's collective cringing can be felt much too often. This contributes to the utter failure of the film's central romance as no amount of chemistry could exist plunged under this writing. An early scene which finally explains the origin of the titular character's surname, has spread its way across the internet for its unbearable corniness. This early scene sets the bar for the kind of writing present in the following scenes, with far too many key plot points revolving around coincidence and underwhelming payoffs. The greatest tragedy from the writer's room is the ending, which is the most anti-climactic in the franchise focusing on setting up an unlikely sequel as opposed to giving a final thrilling climax to the film we're currently watching. Unlike the film's other aspects, the writing is most always the film's worst.
The Gist:
"Solo: A Star Wars Story" is a safe, fun ride which chooses not to take risks and instead focus on justifying an unnecessary prequel on one of cinema's most iconic characters. Performances and Visuals fluctuate between good and bad, while the writing is far too reminiscent of the dreaded prequels. Nothing to miss here, but a quick enjoyable and flawed watch nonetheless. Go ahead and sit in ranked in the dead middle of the franchises cinematic outings.
The story is rather refreshing for the franchise's cinematic presents, being much smaller in scope missing any "fate of the galaxy" stakes. This vastly different approach is far more fitting of the character. This allows for a film focused on providing a fun ride, something the films have been lacking in lately, with "Rogue One" being a dreary slog through the horrors of war, and "The Last Jedi" focusing more on subverting the status quo. It's not that "Solo" is or superior to either of those films, however it is perhaps the type of movie the franchise needed- something refreshing in principle yet so typical in execution.
Unsurprisingly, the film is (for the most part) visually fantastic. Special effects and production design is still Star Wars' strongest element, immersing the audience in the galaxy's crime world. The cinematography continues to make full utilization of the excellent sets and locations, always filling the frame with life and purpose. The locations are perhaps the most grounded of the franchise, preferring very diverse exotic real life locations for filming as opposed to green screen alien worlds. We see expansive sandy beaches, terrifyingly gorgeous snowy mountains, claustrophobic mines, and gritty battlefields. However, when things kick into high gear, the film's visuals begin to fault. The major action scenes gravely suffer from rapid editing and far too much happening on screen, creating an incomprehensible mess, more fitting in a "Transformers" movie. There are exceptions to this, as a particular heist scene early int eh film is one of the franchise's greatest set pieces to date.
As with any Star Wars film, the acting is a mixed bag. Ehrenreich and Glover shine in their portrayals of Solo and Lando respectively. These aren't the iconic characters we knew. They are younger, naive, and unestablished, and the actors realized this. Through their take on the characters we see how they could eventually end up as their confident, charismatic selves present in the OT. The film is far better thanks to this as opposed to just having the new leads give impersonations of Harrison Ford and Billy Dee Williams, as many people had expected. Paul Bettany is also great always igniting the screen with energy and ferocity. Aside from these however, the other performances are very unremarkable. Woody Harrelson plays a Woody Harrelson type, and although she tries, Emilia Clarke fails to bring her role to life and provides the film's weakest, and most forgettable, presence.
Finally, the most unfortunate hallmark of any of the franchise is the less-than-stellar writing. The dialogue here is perhaps the worse since the prequels. The actors genuinely seem uncomfortable delivering their lines, and although it never reaches the awfulness of "I hate sand, its course... blah blah blah", the audience's collective cringing can be felt much too often. This contributes to the utter failure of the film's central romance as no amount of chemistry could exist plunged under this writing. An early scene which finally explains the origin of the titular character's surname, has spread its way across the internet for its unbearable corniness. This early scene sets the bar for the kind of writing present in the following scenes, with far too many key plot points revolving around coincidence and underwhelming payoffs. The greatest tragedy from the writer's room is the ending, which is the most anti-climactic in the franchise focusing on setting up an unlikely sequel as opposed to giving a final thrilling climax to the film we're currently watching. Unlike the film's other aspects, the writing is most always the film's worst.
The Gist:
"Solo: A Star Wars Story" is a safe, fun ride which chooses not to take risks and instead focus on justifying an unnecessary prequel on one of cinema's most iconic characters. Performances and Visuals fluctuate between good and bad, while the writing is far too reminiscent of the dreaded prequels. Nothing to miss here, but a quick enjoyable and flawed watch nonetheless. Go ahead and sit in ranked in the dead middle of the franchises cinematic outings.
Comments
Post a Comment